I am as I adore Shadows in the Night, but I'm predicting that the triple album set could've been edited somewhat. For all 3 discs to hit the spot, that would take some doing.
In 1947, when a New York State justice ordered that Paul Robeson could not speak at an upcoming concert, but could only sing, Robeson decided that his setlist of songs would communicate his message. From then on, his song performances themselves would become his speech. The court sent a stenographer to the concert to take down any words. To toy with the stenographer, there was one part where Robeson spoke in Chinese (one of many languages he spoke)
There are a great many superb songs out there that convey powerful emotions. There are far more than just another 3 CDs worth.
I wouldn´t put it past Dylan to play a set with entirely "crooner" songs in Stockholm, and no originals. Just to make a point to the committee. At least I think there will be very few originals.
I'm a fan of these standards singing experiments. I think Shadows is a very beautiful record, and I like Fallen, too, although I think it's a lot more uneven. But the above comment and video points up an important critical distinction that's worth keeping in mind. Dylan is and has always been an artful, expressive singer, and this is why it's interesting to hear him sing the standards repertoire--and it's why the venture has so far been largely successful, in its way, despite the unevenness (some of it is very moving and exciting, some of it is just interesting, some of it--like the version of "Stardust"--doesn't quite get there). But Dylan's genius is for singing (and songwriting) in a different idiom, and it's in that idiom that he's truly great. That version of "Do Re Mi" is a terrific example. He's still--as is his won't--feeling his way into it in the first verse, but after that, he expresses that song in a powerful way--and in a way no one else could. I don't know if it's better than anything on Tempest, but it's better than anything on these standards records so far--with the key exception of the version of "Lucky Old Son" on Shadows. And I think it's obvious why that's an exception. It's the one tune in these sets so far that's squarely in the idiom in which Dylan long ago made his indelible mark. I'm looking forward to Triplicate, I think it's going to be a lot of fun and full of interesting and beautiful moments, along with a few bits that don't quite come off. The first two tunes that have been released are lovely. I assume there's more where that stuff came from. Luckily, I've got the do re mi to pay for it! L.
Anybody know how this was recorded? The last two were CD digital I think. or 44.1/24. Is this one better?
After 30 to 40 years on a shelf, these records will suffer the fate of most 12 inch 78s pocketed in such albums. 40 years of micro-dust and grease in the air settles on a crescent-shaped part of the record exposed in the notch at the top of the pocket. The early part of the record will have a pronounced swish. A slipcase would prevent that
Does anyone know what the standrad-edition vinyl looks like? The extra $10 is just for the 78-album style package?
I'm still on the fence about buying this. I bought Shadows immediately. I waited a while and finally picked up Fallen Angels. I've not gotten a whole lot of enjoyment out of either of those. Maybe they'll grow on me, but I might skip this release for now.
I got a preorder for this I think at Amazon uk when it was pretty cheap at 35 pounds (including shipping)! Anyone else get in early on this one?
Are you certain you have the 'deluxe' pre-ordered? I ask as the £35 quoted is suspiciously close to the £36 price that Amazon UK had originally for the 3LP set, with the 'deluxe' priced at £45. When I was looking at the beginning it took me a while to actually find the genuine deluxe version on Amazon UK. I think it's still around the £45 mark.
I pre ordered at about £44 and just checked my order now with the price promise it is down to £38.99. Normal vinyl now £32.99. Price History Sales Rank Product Details
Just checked my order link and it's the limited numbered deluxe edition. I also get a break on the VAT since I'm in the US. Interesting that it is currently only 38.99 which I believe will make it even lower than my 32.49 plus shipping cost...
*** star review only in MOJO. It appears the critics who lapped up every second of SITN and who were noticeably less keen on FA, are now suggesting that enough is enough and perhaps it's time for Dylan to start writing again. The question seems to be "Do we really need more of the same?" The MOJO reviewer says that Dylan is being as radical as ever by being the least radical he's ever been with his current stint recording the Great American songbook.
Turn the question around. Do we really need to bother with reading critics? It is time for them to do a little creative writing of their own. I have never bothered with them myself.
Like 'em or loathe 'em but yes, in my opinion, we certainly do need critics in society. They have an important role to fulfil. It's far easier to ascertain the merits of something (that you cannot freely gain access to without paying money or giving up time for) by reading what critics say as opposed to fans or people who are too close to the thing in question to properly judge its comparative value. With music reviews it's probably fair to say that fans of the artist, through no fault of their own, tend to have a slightly coloured and biased judgement. Perhaps as time moves on we will need critics less and less. I've read critical reviews for 40 years. I'm not going to stop now, even when I have the work in question.
I'll agree with that as far as political critics. But most critics (even political writers) spend too much time trying to draw attention to themselves. With the widespread access to music samples (or even complete tracks), there just is not a need for the vast majority of music critics. People should just form their own opinions. Let's keep the intelligent writers who don't spend their time telling artists what to do or listeners what to think.